BOARD OF CERTIFICATION

Decision Information

Decision Content

Office of Mun. Labor Rel. v. CEU, L.237, IBT, 20 OCB 35 (BOC 1977) [Decision No. 35-77 (Cert.)] OFFICE OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING BOARD OF CERTIFICATION ---------------------------------------------X In the Matter of THE OFFICE OF MUNICIPAL LABOR RELATIONS, on behalf of the NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY Petitioner DECISION NO. 35-77 -and-DOCKET NO. RE-84-77 CITY EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 237, I.B.T., and its affiliate, CIVIL SERVICE BAR ASSOCIATION, Respondents ---------------------------------------------X DECISION AND ORDER On November 10, 1977, the Office of Municipal Labor Relations of the City of New York, on behalf of the New York City Housing Authority, filed its petition herein, requesting that the Board of Certification designate as confidential employees an Attorney in the Office of the NYCHA Counsel ... assigned to represent the Authority in labor relations matters ... current incumbent ... Allan Graff and a Housing Manager assigned as an assistant to the General Manager ... designated as coordinator of the Federal Transfer program ... current incumbent ... Virginia Sligif.” The affected Union and employees have received due notice, and no objections have been filed. Accordingly, we shall grant the Employers petition.
Decision No. 35-77 2 Docket No. RE-84-77 0 R D E R NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the powers vested in the Board of Certification by the New York City Collective Bargaining Law, it is hereby ORDERED that the employees described above (and any successor employees in the same positions who perform substantially the same duties and functions as these employees) be, and they hereby are, designated as confidential employees and are excluded from the respective units in Certification CWR-44/67 (as amended by Decisions 83-73, 11-74, 1-75, 52-75 and 57-75) and Certification No. 62A-75 (as amended by Decision No. 10-76). Dated: New York, N.Y. December 30, 1977 ARVID ANDERSON CHAIRMAN WALTER L. EISENBERG MEMBER ERIC J. SCHMERTZ MEMBER
 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.